Utah State University DigitalCommons@USU All Graduate Theses and Dissertations Graduate Studies 5-2011 New Urbanism: Its Interpretation and Implementation Sherri Marie French Utah State University Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/etd Part of the Landscape Architecture Commons Recommended Citation French, Sherri Marie, "New Urbanism: Its Interpretation and Implementation" (2011). All Graduate Theses and Dissertations. 1292. https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/etd/1292 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate Studies at DigitalCommons@USU. It has been accepted for inclusion in All Graduate Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@USU. For more information, please contact [email protected]. NEW URBANISM: ITS INTERPRETATION AND IMPLEMENTATION by Sherri Marie French A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE Approved: ____________________ ____________________ Keith M Christensen, PhD. Carlos V. Licon, PhD. Major Professor Committee Member ____________________ ____________________ Douglas B. Jackson-Smith, PhD. Mark R. McLellan, PhD. Committee Member Vice President for Research and Dean of the School of Graduate Studies UTAH STATE UNIVERSITY Logan, Utah 2012 ii Copyright © Sherri Marie French 2012 All Rights Reserved iii ABSTRACT New Urbanism: Its Interpretation and Implementation by Sherri Marie French, Master of Landscape Architecture Utah State University, 2012 Major Professor: Keith M Christensen Department: Landscape Architecture and Environmental Planning In recent years a new planning movement has emerged popularly known as New Urbanism. This movement has come about in response to typical subdivision design and implementation of single-use Euclidian zoning practices that have been associated with sprawling subdivisions and communities zoned for single uses, and which result in little diversity of income, neighborhoods devoid of any unique character that create a sense of placelessness, increased social isolation and dependence on the automobile, and increased consumption of land and other resources. New Urbanism seeks to mitigate these and other problems through the manipulation of the built environment. Among other solutions, typical New Urbanist communities incorporate mixed use centers, emphasize design of streets and public space as well as parks and open space, provide a variety of housing types, and focus on transit-oriented development. However, iv as is often the case with “new” or different ways of doing things, implementing New Urbanism can be difficult. As such, the purpose of this study is to identify the barriers to successful implementation of key design characteristics of New Urbanist communities. Also of interest as the research developed were the reasons for the success of some communities in being able to implement important design features of New Urbanism. To do this, a typology of spaces associated with New Urbanism and supported by the literature was established. Two communities in Utah’s Salt Lake Valley were then structurally evaluated against this typology. Daybreak and Overlake were the two communities selected, both of which were constructed according to New Urbanist principles. This evaluation informed questions used during interviews with key informants from each community. During these interviews key informants provided information on the original vision of each community, discussed differences between that vision and its implementation, identified barriers to implementing the original vision, and also discussed the gaps identified during the structural assessment. (97 pages) v PUBLIC ABSTRACT New Urbanism: Its Interpretation and Implementation Sherri Marie French New Urbanism is a popular development movement that combines old and new development strategies in an attempt to build unique and lasting communities of value. However, as this movement employs practices that are not currently considered typical, developing in this manner can be difficult. This research seeks to identify the common difficulties that arise during the development of New Urbanist communities as well as possible solutions for overcoming those difficulties. Researching the barriers to implementing principles of New Urbanism is important as this movement may offer solutions to some of the challenges arising from current development practices such as: • Sprawl • Single-use communities • Neighborhoods devoid of any unique character • Social isolation and dependence on the automobile • High consumption of land and other resources If the barriers to implementing the principles of New Urbanism can be identified and solutions found to overcoming these barriers, then developers will be able to more successfully implement the principles of New Urbanism in their communities. As this happens, research can begin determining if the principles of New Urbanism actually mitigate the problems listed above. Determining this would allow for great strides to be made in changing and improving current development practices, which is beneficial not only to those inhabiting these communities, but to society as a whole. vi ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to thank my committee members, Dr. Keith Christensen, Dr. Carlos Licon, and Dr. Douglas Jackson-Smith, for their support, assistance, and ability to adjust and help me adjust as changes happened throughout the process of completing this thesis. This research would not have been completed were it not for them. I would also like to thank the Graduate Student Senate who provided funding for this research through the Graduate Student Senate Research and Projects Grant. These funds have made mine and so many others’ theses possible. I give special thanks to my family, friends, colleagues, and especially my husband, Kenny, for their encouragement, concern, and moral support as I worked my way from the writing of the initial proposal to this final document. I could not have done it without all of you. Sherri Marie French vii CONTENTS Page ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................................... iii PUBLIC ABSTRACT ....................................................................................................................... v ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ................................................................................................................ vi LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................................................... ix LIST OF FIGURES .......................................................................................................................... x INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................... 1 LITERATURE REVIEW ................................................................................................................... 4 Mixed Use Centers .............................................................................................................. 8 Streets and Public Space .................................................................................................... 11 Parks and Open Space ........................................................................................................ 13 Housing ............................................................................................................................... 13 Transit-Oriented Development .......................................................................................... 15 RESEARCH METHODS ................................................................................................................ 17 RESULTS..................................................................................................................................... 22 Daybreak- Structural Assessment ............................................................................................. 22 Mixed Use Centers ............................................................................................................. 23 Streets and Public Space .................................................................................................... 25 Parks and Open Space ........................................................................................................ 28 Housing ............................................................................................................................... 29 Transit-Oriented Development .......................................................................................... 31 Conclusions ......................................................................................................................... 31 Overlake- Structural Assessment .............................................................................................. 33 viii Mixed Use Centers ............................................................................................................. 33 Streets and Public Space .................................................................................................... 35 Parks and Open Space ........................................................................................................ 36 Housing ..............................................................................................................................